The stimulus concludes that under vague laws, people cannot feel secure.
Vague laws --> Not secure Secure --> Laws are not vague
Why? Because vague laws set vague limits on people's freedom and this makes it impossible for people to know for certain whether their actions are legal. In other words, if laws are vague, then people cannot know for certain whether their actions are legal.
Vague laws --> Not know if actions are legal Know if actions are legal --> Laws are not vague
What is the gap in the stimulus' reasoning? We know that vague laws make it impossible for people to know whether their actions are legal. The stimulus takes this to conclude that vague laws result in people being unable to feel secure.
What is the relationship between knowing whether your actions are legal and feeling secure? The stimulus does not say. Therefore, we are looking for an answer choice which allows us to make this connection.
Answer choice (B) tells us that, if people do not know whether their actions are legal, then they might not feel secure. This is too tentative to allow us to properly draw the conclusion. The stimulus concludes that people cannot feel secure, not that they might not feel secure.
On the other hand, answer choice (A) allows us to directly fill the gap outlined above. Remember that "only if" introduces a necessary condition.
Secure --> Know if actions are legal
P: Secure --> Know if actions are legal P: Know if actions are legal --> Laws are not vague C: Secure --> Laws are not vague
Hope this helps! Please let us know if you have any further questions.
